Left Ventricular Ejection Fraction as Criterion for Implantation of an Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator in Heart Failure Patients Undergoing Surgical Left Ventricular Reconstruction

Background: Besides implantation of an implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD), a proportion of patients with left ventricular (LV) dysfunction due to ischemic cardiomyopathy are potential candidates for surgical LV reconstruction (Dor procedure), which changes LV ejection fraction (LVEF) considerably. In these patients, LVEF as selection criterium for ICD implantation may be difficult. This study aimed to determine the value of LVEF as criterium for ICD implantation in heart failure patients undergoing surgical LV reconstruction.
Methods: Consecutive patients with end-stage heart failure who underwent ICD implantation and LV reconstruction were evaluated. During admission, two-dimensional (2D) echocardiography (LV volumes and LVEF) was performed before surgery and was repeated at 3 months after surgery. Over a median follow-up of 18 months, the incidence of ICD therapy was evaluated.
Results: The study population consisted of 37 patients (59 ± 11 years). At baseline, mean LVEF was 23 ± 5%. Mean left ventricular end-systolic volume (LVESV) and left ventricular end-diastolic volume (LVEDV) were 175 ± 73 mL and 225 ± 88 mL, respectively. At 3-month follow-up, mean LVEF was 41 ± 9% (P < 0.0001 vs. baseline), and mean LVESV and LVEDV were 108 ± 65 mL and 176 ± 73 mL, respectively (P < 0.0001 vs. baseline). During 18-month follow-up, 12 (32%) patients had ventricular arrhythmias, resulting in appropriate ICD therapy. No significant relations existed between baseline LVEF (P = 0.77), LVEF at 3-month follow-up (P = 0.34), change in LVEF from baseline to 3-month follow-up (P = 0.28), and the occurrence of ICD therapy during 18-month follow-up.
Conclusion: LVEF before and after surgical LV reconstruction is of limited use as criterium for ICD implantation in patients with end-stage heart failure.     

Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Therapy for Prevention of Sudden Cardiac Death in Children in The Netherlands

Introduction: Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICD) therapy is increasingly used in children. The purpose of this multicenter study is to evaluate mid‐term clinical outcome and to identify predictors for device discharge in pediatric ICD recipients. Methods and Results: From 1995 to 2006, 45 patients in The Netherlands under the age of 18 years received an ICD. Mean age at implantation was 10.8 ± 5.2 years. Primary prevention (N = 22) and secondary prevention (N = 23) were equally distributed. Underlying cardiac disorders were primary electrical disease (55%), cardiomyopathy (20%), and congenital heart disease (17%). The follow‐up was 44 ± 32.9 months. Three patients (7%) died and one patient (2%) underwent heart transplantation. ICD‐related complications occurred in eight patients (17%), seven of whom had lead‐related complications. Fourteen patients (31%) received appropriate ICD shocks; 12 patients (27%) received inappropriate ICD shocks. Fifty‐five percent of 22 ICD recipients under the age of 12 years received appropriate shocks, which was higher as compared with 9% of 23 older ICD recipients (P = 0.003). Although the incidence of appropriate shocks in the present study was larger in secondary prevention (9/23; 39%) as compared with primary prevention (5/22; 23%), this difference did not reach significance. Conclusions: In our population of patients, children <12 years of age had more appropriate shocks than patients 13–18 years. The complication rate is low, and is mainly lead related. (PACE 2010; 33:179–185)